Reflections on Arts Education and the USDOE

It’s interesting to see the fairly predictable responses to Arne Duncan’s letter and web conference, where he articulated support for arts education on behalf of the USDOE and the White House.

There is and should be a fair amount of gratitude across the field when a US Secretary of Education affirms the importance of the arts, even if the affirmation may at first blush appear to be more talk than walk.

And in light of his comments about the central importance of parents to ensuring arts education, well, it was indeed newsworthy.

I think the USDOE is in a bit of a bind. I have come to pretty much believe that Duncan supports the arts. Same for our President. That being said, they have focused their efforts on school “reform” that is heavily weighted towards levers that have little to do with subject matter, save what is measured by ELA/ math standardized tests and graduation rates. In terms of major themes, the USDOE is about data, charter school development, merit pay, etc. Outside of that, there isn’t much room to focus on content areas.

Yes there are both the model development and the professional development grant programs, as well NAEP and the Fast Track Survey. In particular, I am a big fan of the grant programs, which are great, really great, believe me, the organization I work for is a current grant recipient. But, when you look at where the real weight of the USDOE is leaning, it’s not in this area.

Nevertheless, the rhetorical does have meaning. The bully pulpit does help remind educators of the importance of the arts. Symbolism counts. To a point.

Will a principal take time from test prep because we brandished Arne Duncan’s letter reminding them that the arts are a core subject in what we used to call NCLB, but is actually the Elementary and Secondary Education Act?

Probably not, but that’s a bit of what is already being proposed by advocates.

If the arts or any other subject for that matter is to be a part of these public themes coming out of the USDOE, it’s going to be up to us to find the way in. And yes, that includes the Race to the Top Fund. Who will be able to construct an appropriate arts education project within their state’s RTTF application? The state education departments aren’t going to do it for us, we have to do it, find a way to bring them on board. Duncan has said as much, a couple of times.

In all fairness, what I am describing is in many ways the very state of arts education in the US. It is up to us to find the openings, to make new alliances, to bring the arts into policy and practice that loom large in education, but have often overlooked and misunderstood arts education.

So, there is it. The Secretary says the right things, but essentially leaves it to us to make his words come true. Perhaps that is the way it should be.

|
filed under: |

Richard Kessler

Dewey21C

is a blog dedicated to the belief that the arts are part of our genetic code. The belief that the arts are in the DNA of every person, and that our job as teachers, parents, mentors, advocates, and administrators is to provide quality, sustained arts … [Read More...]

Listening

Blogroll

For those who have followed Dewey21C, hopefully you’ve noticed that I have been silent since the end of July. A month off from work followed that last post, and as we’re blowing through September, I have started a new chapter in my career as Dean of the Mannes College The New School for Music.

It’s not all that often that one gets a month off. It was a month that I viewed as time to leave behind the past seven years at The Center for Arts Education, while clearing my mind for the very new challenge of leading a music conservatory that is part of a fairly unorthodox university (The New School). It didn’t hurt that one of the founders of The New School, and father of its initial educational design was none other than John Dewey.

There is so much that I want to share about these early days in my tenure. I thought it would be a good call to start with something that had that sort of cold water in the face feel as soon as arrived at The New School.

In K-12, the pathway to college is and has been for many years the brass ring. Ten years ago it was simply getting students to college. For arts educators, we were being asked what we were doing to increase the high school graduation rates, with the presumption that graduates would move along to college at increasing rates, in addition to simply ensuring a higher high school graduation rate and all that it implies. Slowly it became about college and career readiness, which is the key frame for the Common Core Standards. What should a student know and be able to do in college and career. One way or the other, K-12 policy has been about getting more and more students to college, even if remediation rates are alarmingly high.

At the very same time, higher education is under fire. In almost every respect higher education is being challenged, whether it’s on the basis of cost, design, relevancy, etc.

Some say it’s better to attend DIY college. Others question the value of the degree altogether. It’s too expensive. It’s too abstract. The model is busted. There is no accountability. There is no data. It is hand cuffed by tenure and unions. Freshman enrollment is down. Students are taking longer to graduate.

Naturally, the above includes just a few issues in common with K-12.

You have to admit, at the very least, how fascinating it is to witness a sort of accountability movement in higher education, one which at time calls to question fundamental value, while at the very same time, most of K-12 policy continues to triangulate on moving students to college.

For me, at my new position, there is one particular question from K-12 that I find to be the perfect lens to peer through: what should a graduate know and be able to do. It is through that particular frame that I believe assessment and improvement is possible at my new job.